participation of civil society necessary but insufficient, as civil society organisations have little influence or power (Spain – trade unions). Spanish stakeholders also indicated that civil society contributions have sometimes not been taken into account by national authorities (Spain – various activities).
In Bulgaria, stakeholders had the impression that civil society was not sufficiently interested in the question of pesticides and indicated a lack of participation by them in the debate (Bulgaria - employers). Trade union representatives also underlined the poorly functioning social dialogue between employers and workers and the lack of collective work agreements.
In Ireland, stakeholders agreed that civil society is involved in the discussion on pesticides (Ireland – various activities) and is very well organised to input their views into legislation (Ireland - employers). However, Irish stakeholders highlighted the lack of knowledge and understanding regarding pesticides from some civil society organisations (Ireland – employers and various activities). They stressed the need for adequately qualified specialists working on the topic, especially in terms of toxicology and chemistry (Ireland – various activities, Spain – various activities). Organisations should be better informed (Spain – various activities). There was also a call to make farmers' voices more clearly heard (Ireland – public authorities).
In Croatia, stakeholders indicated a very low involvement of civil society on all European legislation related to the sustainable management of pesticides (Croatia – public authorities). They underlined that the discourse on pesticides was mediated by NGOs advocating for a complete ban on pesticides. These extreme positions do not have any scientific foundation. In such a climate, the interests of farmers and food producers remain essentially neglected (Croatia - employers).
Share with your friends: |